<< Previous Message Main Index Next Message >>
<< Previous Message in Thread This Month Next Message in Thread >>
Date   : Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:10:54 +0000
From   : Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...>
Subject: Re: 3.5 / 5.25 floppy disk reliability

Paul J wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Have been running my beeb with a 3.5 pc drive for a few months now, and
> running out of old 3.5 double density disks.  Have heard that you can use
> modern high density disks by covering a hole, but may have problems with
> long term reliability because the magnetic layer is different to double
> density disks. Would be interested to hear about your experience if you have
> been using high densitiy disks as double density.

Wouldn't recommend it myself. It's certainly a no-no using 'punched' DD disks 
in an HD drive, and I wouldn't fancy the chances of going the other way 
either, or ever reliably using those disks in a different drive.

Find yourself a local freecycle list and ask there for DD disks; I bet you'll 
find lots available.

> I started off using 5.25 disks, but had to clean the heads every week or so
> with the brown gunk from the disks. Is this a common problem or do I just
> have a poor batch of disks ?

Depends how much use the drive saw in those weeks and how the disks had 
previously been stored :)

Moderate use with good quality media shouldn't pose any such problems - the 
flipside being that I've certainly imaged batches of disks before where I 
could do maybe five disks inbetween head cleans in order to read data reliably.

Chances are you have a decaying batch of disks, or they're just exceedingly 
dirty and leaving a lot of junk on the drive heads.

I doubt it's the drive, although I did have one recently where the lower head 
decided to part company with the drive, resulting in a disk that had most of 
the lower surface missing :)

> Which disks should be more reliable, have heard that technically 5.25 disks
> should be, but just wondering if in practice that 3.5 disks are a better
> option ?

I'd put my money on 5.25" media - wider heads and lower surface density has to 
be a good thing when reading and writing data.

I wouldn't expect any problems from branded 3.5" DD disks though - the only 
media I make a habit of steering clear of are *new* 3.5" HD floppies, as the 
quality these days is awful and they go bad extremely quickly :(

cheers

Jules
<< Previous Message Main Index Next Message >>
<< Previous Message in Thread This Month Next Message in Thread >>